These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29535965)

  • 1. Comparison of accuracy between panoramic radiography, cone-beam computed tomography, and ultrasonography in detection of foreign bodies in the maxillofacial region: an
    Abdinian M; Aminian M; Seyyedkhamesi S
    J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2018 Feb; 44(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 29535965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of Visibility of Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region: Comparison of Computed Tomography, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
    Valizadeh S; Pouraliakbar H; Kiani L; Safi Y; Alibakhshi L
    Iran J Radiol; 2016 Oct; 13(4):e37265. PubMed ID: 27895878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of Ultrasonography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone Beam Computed Tomography for Detection of Foreign Bodies in Maxillofacial Region.
    Shokri A; Jamalpour M; Jafariyeh B; Poorolajal J; Sabet NK
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2017 Apr; 11(4):TC15-TC19. PubMed ID: 28571230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Diagnostic yield of cone beam computed tomography for small foreign body detection in the hand in comparison with radiography, MSCT and MRI: an ex vivo study.
    Jandl NM; Rolvien T; Rupp T; Schumacher U; Püschel K; Maas KJ; Amling M; Henes FO; Spink C
    Injury; 2021 Oct; 52(10):2841-2847. PubMed ID: 33487409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Detection of different foreign bodies in the maxillofacial region with spiral computed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study.
    Abolvardi M; Akhlaghian M; Hamidi Shishvan H; Dastan F
    Imaging Sci Dent; 2020 Dec; 50(4):291-298. PubMed ID: 33409137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Detection of foreign bodies by spiral computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in maxillofacial regions.
    Kaviani F; Javad Rashid R; Shahmoradi Z; Gholamian M
    J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects; 2014; 8(3):166-71. PubMed ID: 25346836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and ultrasonography with two types of probes in the detection of opaque and non-opaque foreign bodies.
    Demiralp KO; Orhan K; Kurşun-Çakmak EŞ; Gorurgoz C; Bayrak S
    Med Ultrason; 2018 Dec; 20(4):467-474. PubMed ID: 30534654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Identification of various orthodontic materials as foreign bodies via panoramic radiography, cone beam computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography: an in vitro study.
    Isman O; Isman E
    Oral Radiol; 2021 Jul; 37(3):524-530. PubMed ID: 34037939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparative Sensitivity Assessment of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Digital Radiography for detecting Foreign Bodies.
    Lari SS; Shokri A; Hosseinipanah SM; Rostami S; Sabounchi SS
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2016 Mar; 17(3):224-9. PubMed ID: 27207202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Visibility of Different Intraorbital Foreign Bodies Using Plain Radiography, Computed Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: An In Vitro Study.
    Javadrashid R; Golamian M; Shahrzad M; Hajalioghli P; Shahmorady Z; Fouladi DF; Sadrarhami S; Akhoundzadeh L
    Can Assoc Radiol J; 2017 May; 68(2):194-201. PubMed ID: 26899378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diagnosis of simulated condylar bone defects using panoramic radiography, spiral tomography and cone-beam computed tomography: A comparison study.
    Salemi F; Shokri A; Mortazavi H; Baharvand M
    J Clin Exp Dent; 2015 Feb; 7(1):e34-9. PubMed ID: 25810839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Visibility of different foreign bodies in the maxillofacial region using plain radiography, CT, MRI and ultrasonography: an in vitro study.
    Javadrashid R; Fouladi DF; Golamian M; Hajalioghli P; Daghighi MH; Shahmorady Z; Niknejad MT
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2015; 44(4):20140229. PubMed ID: 25426703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detection of periodontal bone loss using digital intraoral and cone beam computed tomography images: an in vitro assessment of bony and/or infrabony defects.
    Vandenberghe B; Jacobs R; Yang J
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jul; 37(5):252-60. PubMed ID: 18606746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The detection of wooden foreign bodies: An experimental study comparing direct digital radiography (DDR) and ultrasonography.
    Mercado LNS; Hayre CM
    Radiography (Lond); 2018 Nov; 24(4):340-344. PubMed ID: 30292503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography imaging of the temporomandibular joint: comparisons with panoramic radiology and linear tomography.
    Honey OB; Scarfe WC; Hilgers MJ; Klueber K; Silveira AM; Haskell BS; Farman AG
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):429-38. PubMed ID: 17920495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and panoramic radiographs in detecting maxillary sinus septa.
    Toraman Alkurt M; Peker I; Degerli S; Cebeci ARİ; Sadik E
    J Istanb Univ Fac Dent; 2016; 50(3):8-14. PubMed ID: 28955570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Detection and measurements of apical lesions in the upper jaw by cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography as a function of cortical bone thickness.
    Ketabi AR; Ketabi S; Nabli MB; Lauer HC; Brenner M
    Clin Oral Investig; 2019 Nov; 23(11):4067-4073. PubMed ID: 30796590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the identification of the mandibular canal as part of presurgical dental implant assessment.
    Angelopoulos C; Thomas SL; Hechler S; Parissis N; Hlavacek M
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2008 Oct; 66(10):2130-5. PubMed ID: 18848113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diagnostic accuracy of panoramic radiography, stereo-scanography and cone beam CT for assessment of mandibular third molars before surgery.
    Hauge Matzen L; Christensen J; Hintze H; Schou S; Wenzel A
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2013 Nov; 71(6):1391-8. PubMed ID: 23356838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Radiological evaluation of maxillofacial soft tissue calcifications with cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography.
    Yeşilova E; Bayrakdar İŞ
    Int J Clin Pract; 2021 May; 75(5):e14086. PubMed ID: 33576139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.